Scientific Update and Errata

Updated July 23, 2010

We want this game to be as good, and as scientifically accurate, as possible . . . so we will maintain this file on the Web. There are three categories. Card Corrections represent changes which will certainly be made, if and when the card is reprinted. Scientific Issues are questions where we think more research may be needed before we make a change . . . feel free to comment if you think you can help us out! And Frequently Asked Questions will clarify rules where needed.

Our thanks go to all the scientists and playtesters who helped make this game what it is, and those who commented after it was completed. Any remaining errors are the responsibility of the designer . . . who will do his best to improve future editions!

As dinosaur science advances, we learn new things about our favorite creatures . . . and, sometimes, the things we thought we knew turn out not to be true. And as more dinosaur experts look at Dino Hunt, we will continue to learn more . . . so there is always room for changes and clarifications.

This correction applies only to the boxed set. The gold-bordered Limited Edition card is fine.

An error at the printers substituted one name and picture for another. This card was supposed to be Triceratops, and the text is right for Triceratops.

Acanthopholis was a nodosaur – an ankylosaur without a tail club. It is known only from incomplete remains; the fossils we have tell us that it was small for its family, but very spiky!

We suggest that you either set this card aside, or ignore the art and title and play it according to the text.

If you would like a replacement for this card, just return it to us. You can either include it with a mail order, or just send the card along with a stamped, self-addressed envelope. We will use your envelope to send you TWO randomly selected Limited Edition cards.

The dinosaur card in the "Demo Hunt" edition disagrees with the one in the boxed set and the 1996 Limited Edition. That's because, after "Demo Hunt" was printed, we got better information about the size of this dinosaur, which is reflected in the newer cards. The Score 8 is the newer one. Feel free to play with both cards, though . . . the Score 6 one just represents a smaller specimen!

Update: Brian Curtice tells us: "After examining USNM 10865 and CM 84 again, I have concluded that Dystylosaurus edwini (the third supergiant dinosaur named by Jensen) is 80% likely to belong to Supersaurus. This change comes from havin g gained permission to move the Dystylosaurus holotype specimen out of storage, which revealed a very exciting anterior face. These results are currently being written up in our forthcoming "Osteology of Supersaurus vivianae Jensen, 1985 " manuscript . . . I did publish on this business in my thesis . . . there is a citable reference (Curtice, Brian, 1996, Codex of diplodocid caudal vertebrae from the Dry Mesa Dinosaur Quarry, MS thesis at Brigham Young University)."

So, unless new information comes to light, Dystylosaurus turns out to be just another name for Supersaurus, and there will be no further cards for Dystylosaurus.

Update: At the 1996 annual meeting of the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology, a paper by Bell, Sheldon, Lamb and Martin presented the first direct evidence that mosasaurs did, in fact, give birth to live young! They have been studying a fossil of the mosasaur Plioplatecarpus which contains two very small skeletons of the same species, and the lack of acid-edching of the small bones seems to indicate that the babies had not just been eaten by the adult.

When we know something has changed, we'll post it above, as an update. If we get less definite information that puts a card in question, we'll post it in this section immediately. But we also invite feedback from other scientists, to make sure we don't change a card based on just one interpretation.

". . .I really do not believe you have anything to be worried about Allosaurus in Australia. I have read the citation also plus the John Long article on "The Enigmatic Dinosaur Faunas of Australia." To put it in a nutshell, the Early Cretaceous Australian Allosaurus is based only on a single foot bone (an astragulus) which is similar to Allosaurus of North America. There are many "allosaur-like" theropods which lived into the early Cretaceous, especially in China, East Africa, Australia, North America, and maybe Europe. As for Allosaurus, its reign is restricted to the latest of the Late Jurassic."

"I'd take strong argument with (John Schniederman) over that, as we have more than a single astragalus. We also have the base of a large claw, and a number of vertebrae that appear to fit well within the shape and size categories for the genus Allosaurus. While as yet we do not have, and are unlikely to find, a full skeleton, there is more evidence to say that the large theropod we are finding pieces of is a species in the genus Allosaurus, than to be a member of another large theropod genus. Yes, I know this puts it way out of time, but this appears to fit in with the patterns shown by the survival of the Labyrinthodonts in the same rock sequences, and the "early" finds of Protoceratopsids and Ornithomimids in the same rock sequences. Australia is, and will continue to be a very interesting place for dinosaur digging!"

Update: At the 1996 annual meeting of the Society for Vertebrate Paleontology, a paper by Bell, Sheldon, Lamb and Martin presented the first direct evidence that mosasaurs did, in fact, give birth to live young! They have been studying a fossil of the mosasaur Plioplatecarpus which contains two very small fossils of the same species, and the lack of acid-etching of the small bones seems to indicate that the babies had not simply been eaten by the adult.

Answer: No, but there might be one for 1998. Some interesting new creatures have been discovered! No, we don't yet know what format the 1998 set might be in . . . collectable, noncollectable, whatever.

Answer: Yes. The cards in your "zoo" should be visible to the other players. They are allowed to know what you have captured and what your current point score is. It's easy to set them on the table so just the names and points show – that way, the cards don't take up much space.

However, if you have Special cards like High Feeding, which give a point bonus for capturing certain kinds of dinosaurs, you may keep them in your hand until the end of the game and let the bonuses come as a surprise to your rivals.

On my daughter's turn I played the Extinction special card, removing the last of the dinos on the table. In my hand I have the Follow the Tracks card. Can I play this card or is the game over?

Answer: A strict reading of the rules might say the game is over. That wasn't the intent, though. When the last dinosaur is gone, if any player has a card which can immediately bring back dinosaurs from the discard stack, the game continues.

How about the Good Luck card? Can I use it after the game is over to cancel a Midnight Snack card?

This card affects "baby dinosaurs." I don't see any baby dinosaur cards in my game box . . . ?

Answer: Right. The technical term here is "Steve goofed." This Special was supposed to appear only in the booster packs. There are several different kinds of baby dinosaur in the boosters. If you don't plan to get any booster packs, you should set this Special aside, or swap it with someone who does have booster packs and baby dinos.